“If a ‘religion’ is defined to be a system of ideas that contains unprovable statements, then Gödel taught us that mathematics is not only a religion, it is the only religion that can prove itself to be one.” –John Barrow

Image is from the front cover of the most important medieval picture bible to survive. But the caption is all my fault. Anyone can fool some of the people some of the time, but to enrage all of the people all of the time, that takes talent. Don’t worry, I’ve got no future in comedy; I’ll stick to the astrophysics.

Also, for those of you who want something fun to puzzle over, try this fun math fact.

102 + 112 + 122 = 132 + 142. Is there an explanation? Or is it just a coincidence?

I’m not sure what sort of “explanation” is needed. If one is looking for 3 consecutive squares which have the same sum as the next two consecutive squares, that boils down to a quadratic equation x^2+(x+1)^2+(x+2)^2=(x+3)^2+(x+4)^2, which when expanded, simplified, and factored, is equivalent to (x-10)(x+2)=0, implying that 10^2+11^2+12^2=13^2+14^2 and (-2)^2+(-1)^2+0^2=1^2+2^2 (this last one’s a bit trivial, though) are the only solutions.

Is that an explanation? A coincidence? I dunno.

Looking at this sequence more generally, you have:

0^2 = ??? (added for completeness)
3^2+4^2=5^2
10^2+11^2+12^2=13^2+14^2
21^2+…
36^2+…
55^2+…
78^2+…
etc.
The first number appears to be the nth triangular number where n is the number of terms on both sides of the equals sign (the 1st triangular number is 0, and there are 1 terms in 0^2=???, the 3rd triangular number is 3, and there are 3 terms in 3^2+4^2=5^2, etc).

A religion can claim to be a religion though, and still satisfy the definition. The definition also leaves room for incorrect ideas, so it’s possible for a religion to claim that it proves itself to be a religion, or to claim anything at all really!, and still satisfy the definition of religion.

I prefer the Spaceman Spiff crashing planets together to get the math answer or the Dirk Derringer series, where Calvin gets beat up by goons, which leads him to the conclusion that it’s a numbers game. The only number big enough to pull it off, of course, is Mr. Billion.

The inside of the sphere isn’t a drug trip; it’s obviously an indication of Jesus’ use of fractals, in the creation of he universe. As for the intense gaze, you would prefer or would join those that accuse God of not paying attention, when creating said universe.

As for numerical coincidence: Numbers are what they are, no more no less; therefore, it would be hard, if not impossible, to prove that there is any coincidence to inherent properties. Though, as an astrophysicist should well know, that doesn’t mean that the universe is deterministic, by any stretch of the imagination (okay, maybe you could stretch your imagination that far). bc

That Bill Watterson from Calvin and Hobbes is the strangest character he just stopped drawing those cartoons and has disappeared as if he was sucked into a Black Hole … no information is coming out ever-since … it’s too weird 4 me.

The irony? Atheism IS a religion,,, aka,, a “belief in things unseen” (see panel 3). To believe that the double helix (20 in the simplest life we know) magically floated together, delicately and cogently, only to destroy itself to replicate?,, aka,, ABIOGENETIC ORIGIN OF LIFE,,, is a leap of “faith”, the odds of which are almost infinite.

For “unseen” substitute “for which there is no evidence”. There is evidence besides being able to see. Maybe you were just being brief, but I thought I should straighten that out.

“… aka,, ABIOGENETIC ORIGIN OF LIFE,,, is a leap of “faith”, the odds of which are almost infinite.”

We have pretty good evidence that there was a point in time at which there was no life on Earth, and a time later than that when there was. This is evidence that abiogenesis occurred.

That it occurred is a different question that identifying the mechanism by which it occurred.

Given our experiences, there is no reason to specify supernatural intervention as the default answer for any phenomenon for which we have no identified mechanism, if only because there is no previous example where, after investigation, that turned out to be the case. We just don’t see magic occurring.

Harry from Tennessee: Bravo. The math for evolution doesn’t add up. Even billions of years is not long enough to go from single cells to the incredible complexity of today’s living organisms. Where are the transitional creatures? Why aren’t we still changing, becoming more complex? God as Creator, Word of God as truth, seeing how the evidence fits those stories brilliantly: Why is that so hard? Why the knee-jerk reaction of that not being scientific thinking?

“Even billions of years is not long enough to go from single cells to the incredible complexity of today’s living organisms. ”

It’s VASTLY more time than strictly necessary.

You can get from “patch of skin that is minimally light sensitive” to “full human eyes with humous and varifocal lens” in 30,000 generations.

Because any useful change is kept, it’s not a random walk to “having eyes” (or “making a hippopotamus”) but a progresstion from “not having eyes” (or “being a simple RNA replicator”) to the any advanced product via incremental change without direction, but keeping those elements that are useful.

A shadow from the sky much too big to be a bird
A screaming crashing noise louder than I’ve ever heard
It looked like two big silver trees that somehow learned to soar
Suddenly a summer breeze and a mighty lion’s roar
—

“Not “the fruit of the tree of life”, but “the fruit of the tree of .knowledge” no porkie there!”

nope, still huge porkie pies.

Adam and Eve ate the fruit, didn’t die from eating it.

Duh.

PS that tree was really “knowledge you’re a slave”. Not to mention that god’s being portrayed as a huge dick there. Put the damn tree in hell or underneath a huge mountain and put a label on it “NO EATING”. Totally avoiding the need to kill himself later so he can kid on he cares for us.